Search Unsplash photos by keyword and filter by orientation or count to find images for your project.
Search Unsplash photos.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | What to search for | |
| per_page | No | Photos to return (max 30, default 10) | |
| access_key | Yes | Unsplash Access Key | |
| orientation | No | Filter by orientation |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.11Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that – no mention of required API key/auth, rate limits, or result paging behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with no waste, but it is so terse that it omits useful context an agent would need.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With four parameters (including a required access_key) and no output schema, the description should say something about auth requirements, default result count, or what a search returns. It leaves all of that to the schema and annotations.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters including the orientation enum and per_page max are documented in the schema. The description offers no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Unsplash photos'), which is enough for an agent to know it queries the photo catalog rather than fetching a single asset. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like unsplash_get_photo or unsplash_random_photo.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this versus unsplash_get_photo, unsplash_random_photo, or the many other image tools. The agent must infer that 'search by keyword' is the selecting condition.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.